IELTS nuclear technology essay

The threat of nuclear weapons maintains world peace. Nuclear power

provides cheap and clean energy. The benefits of nuclear technology far

outweigh the disadvantages. Do you agree or disagree? Give reasons for

your answer.

One question that has caused a great deal of controversy over the years is nuclear

technology. Although it offers a number of advantages in world peace and green power,

it is also a dangerous technology, I believe that it is also a dangerous technology.

The opponents of nuclear power generally base their arguments on the danger it

represents to the world. There are two main dangers: the risk of nuclear warfare and the

nuclear disasters. The danger of nuclear war is obvious and if one thinks about

Chernobyl, it is easy to understand why people are worried about nuclear power, as it

can cause major suffering.

There are, however, good reasons for believing that nuclear technology is generally

advantageous. The first of these is that there has not been a major world conflict since

the invention of nuclear weapons. While there have been wars, they have not been on

the same scale as the Second World War. It is possible to say that the world is a safer

place because of nuclear weapons.

The other most significant benefit relates to the environment. Perhaps the greatest

danger facing our world today is a combination of global warming and the greenhouse

effect. This danger is caused partly by burning fossil fuels which leads to our polluted
atmosphere. Nuclear power, however, is a much greener alternative which does not have

such negative effects. Furthermore, in the last 50 years there have not been too many

nuclear disasters and many experts claim that it is in fact a safe technology.

In conclusion I would say that nuclear technology is better than the current alternatives.

However, I also believe we should keep looking for ways to make it safer.

Subjects such as Art, Sport and Music are being dropped from the school

curriculum for subjects such as Information Technology. Many people

children suffer as a result of these changes. To what extent would you

support or reject the idea of moving these subjects from school

curriculum?

In recent times there has been much debate about which subjects should be included on

the school curriculum. One particular issue is whether the introduction of more modern

subjects such as IT for more traditional subjects such as art and music disadvantages the

pupils. I believe that this is a difficult question and different solutions need to be found

for primary and secondary schools.

There is one major argument in favor of replacing art, music and sport on the

curriculum with subjects like IT. This is that the purpose of school is to prepare children

for their working life after school, so the subjects on the curriculum should be relevant

to their potential careers. From this point of view, IT is much relevant to schoolchildren

as they need to be computer literate if they want to survive in the workplace. For
example, it is easy to see that word processing and programming skills will impress

employers more than the ability to run fast or draw well.

There are also, however, strong arguments for retaining the more traditional subjects as

part of the curriculum. One significant counter-argument is that the purpose of

education is not just to prepare children for later careers, but also to develop their all-

round “culture”. It is important that children leave school with some knowledge of art,

music and sport as all these are all help develop aspects of young people’s personalities.

My own personal point of view is that there is merit in both sides of the debate and that

all children should study some IT, art music and sport at least at primary school. At

secondary school, however, children should be offered a choice between these subjects

so that they can continue to study them if they wish.

In the past lectures were the traditional method of teaching large numbers

of students. Nowadays new technology is increasingly being used to teach

students. What are the advantages and disadvantages of this new approach?
As we move into the twenty-first century, technology is affecting many different areas of

life and education is no exception. Indeed, in some institutions traditional forms of

education have been revolutionized by new technology to the extent that the lecture is

no longer the main method of delivery. While there are a variety of benefits to this new

approach, there are also significant drawbacks.

Perhaps the greatest bonus of the introduction of technology is the flexibility it offers.

This is evident in two different ways. Firstly, it is now no longer essential for students to

be present in the lecture theatre for their courses. This means that part-time courses for

adults who are in employment and distance learning courses for people in other

countries are now much more practical. Another area of flexibility is of course that the

lecturer and tutor are able to use Moodle’s, interactive whiteboards and other tools to

deliver their courses in a more stimulating way to large numbers of students.

Not everything, however, about the introduction of this new technology into education is

positive. One major problem is that not all students are comfortable with using

technology, even if they are part of the digital native generation. This is a serious

issue as they may suffer from their lack of technological skills. Another related issue is

that education is a human activity and it works best with as much human interaction as

possible. Impersonal technology cannot replace the human contact found in

traditional face-to-face tutorials and seminars.

As we have seen, there are major benefits to the introduction of technology into

education, not least because it enables modern forms of education such as distance

learning courses. This is balanced, however, by the fact that it can be too impersonal for

some and disadvantages others for their lack of technological skills.

spent on space research justifiable? Could the money be better spent?

There has always been considerable discussion about whether governments should

spend tax payers’ money on space research. In my view it is impossible to justify the

amount of money spent on such projects. Generally speaking, the main reason for this

position is that there are several areas in which the money could be invested better.

The first point to make is that politicians have a responsibility to spend public money

on projects that bring a benefit to the general public. This has not been the case with

space research as most developments have been limited to helping astronauts in space

or have been very specialized. For example, it is not of great value to the general public

that we now have pens and biros that can write upside down. This does not merit the

huge amount of money spent.

The second point to make is that there are many much more urgent projects on Earth

that require investment. If governments spent less money on space research, then they
would be able to help solve some of these problems such as population control,

elimination of diseases like cholera, global warming and food shortages. It seems to

me that all of these issues are more important because they affect the lives of millions

of ordinary people. An illustration of this is that the US government could provide food

for all the starving people in the world if they did not spend so much on NASA.

My conclusion is that politicians should not fund space research. The

grounds for saying this are that it is very costly and provides few real

benefits. Furthermore, there are several more urgent issues that need to

be funded.
Some people think that only staff who worked in a company for a

long time should be promoted to a higher position. What's your

opinion?

One of the reasons why companies choose to promote some staff is seniority.

While length of service is undoubtedly an important factor, my belief is it should

certainly not be the only criterion for deciding who should be promoted. Rather it

would be better for companies to have a more varied policy in this area. There are

without question sound arguments for promoting employees who have been

working for a company for a number of years. The first of these is that these more

experienced employees would be able to adapt themselves to being in a higher

position, as they would understand the culture and policies of the company better.

Again, on a practical level, if they were not promoted, they might well leave the

company to find a higher position and earn a larger salary. This could have serious

consequences for the company, which might lose a significant amount of business

to its competitors. Despite these reasons, there is a strong argument in favor of also

promoting staff because of their performance. This can be seen by how some multi
-nationals use annual performance and development reviews when deciding on

promotion. Under this system a supervisor can set targets for an employee and if

those targets are met, then the employee can be promoted, even if they are

relatively junior. The benefit of this approach is that it encourages staff to work

harder and rewards merit and not just long service. In conclusion, there is no doubt

a case for implementing a policy of promoting long serving members of staff, but I

believe that it is also wise to take account of the performance of more junior

members of staff.

In many countries there has been an increase in social problems involving

teenagers in recent years. Many people believe that this is due to modern
lifestyles because parents spend more and more time at work and have less

time to supervise their children. To what extent do you believe this is true?

There is no question that standards of behavior have fallen among teenagers. The

popular belief is that the principle cause is that parents are unable to supervise their

children because they are away at work. I only partially agree with this viewpoint as

there are other important factors too.

It is undeniable that parents should bear some responsibility for the actions of their

teenaged children. This is particularly true when they are absent from the home and not

in a position to control their children. The argument is that if they were at home, then

they would be able to make certain that their children did not join gangs and spent their

time on socially acceptable activities.

However, it can also be said that working parents are in fact setting a good example to

their children. Indeed, it is very often the case that teenagers who come from

hardworking families spend their time on schoolwork and conduct themselves well. In

fact, the teenagers who do create social problems by, for example, getting drunk or

painting graffiti come from homes where parents are unemployed.

Other factors that lead to teenagers getting into trouble relate to the educational

system. This is due to the fact that many teenagers leave school aged 16 and do not find

work because of lack of qualifications. As a result, they spend time on the street with

nothing productive to do. Likewise, social problems with teenagers can be the

consequence of poor discipline at school with teachers failing to control their classes.
In conclusion, it is possible to say that this sort of problem is only sometimes the result

of parents not supervising their children. It is equally possible to say that discipline in

schools is at fault.

(299 words)

Differences between countries become less evident each year. Nowadays, all

over the world people share the same fashions, advertising, brands, eating

habits and TV channels. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages of

this?

It is undoubtedly the case that the world today has become a global village. One of the

effects of this is that increasingly people in all corners of the world are exposed to similar

services and products and adopt similar habits. My view is that this is largely a beneficial

process and in this essay I will explain why.

globalization, but these are relatively minor. The most significant of these disadvantages

is that it can weaken national culture and traditions. For example, if people watch films

and television programs produced in the United States, sometimes they adopt aspects of

the lifestyle of the American characters they see on television. Typically, however, this

only affects minor details such as clothing and does not seriously threaten national

identity.

When we turn to the other side of the argument, there are two major points to make in

favor of this process. The first of these is that the more we share habits, products and

services, the better we understand each other and this reduces prejudice against other

nations. The other point relates to modernity. It is a sign of progress in a society that

people no longer are restricted to brands and advertisements from their own society but

are able to access more international goods. If, for example, there were unable to drink

Coca Cola or wear Nike, then that would mean their society was not part of the

international community.

In conclusion, I understand the point of view of people who worry about cultural

globalization because it is a threat to national traditions. However, this is outweighed by

its positive impact on international understanding and the fact that it represents progress

within a society.
One of the major problems facing the world today is the growing number of

refugees. The developed nations in the world should tackle this problem by

taking in more refugees. To what extent do you agree with this opinion?

There is little doubt that the issue of refugees is a global problem. While it most

immediately affects developing nations, there is a strong argument that industrialized

countries should help by allowing higher levels of immigration. This is certainly not an

easy issue though, because historically immigration has caused as many problems as it

solves.

The principal reason why developed nations should help is that we now live in a global

village and it is no longer possible to ignore what happens on the other side of the world.

This is partly a moral issue and partly because it is in the economic self-interest of

industrialized nations to ensure that developing nations continue to progress. A

practical way of achieving this would be to accept more immigration, particularly when

it is caused by natural disasters or civil war.

I would argue, however, that this is not an open and shut case, as there is a negative side

to mass immigration. The multi-cultural experiments in Europe have not always

succeeded and immigrants have often suffered badly from racism and other prejudices.

On a practical level, refugees are sometimes better off receiving aid in their native land

than begging on the streets in a country where they cannot speak the language. Many

so-called economic migrants end up returning to the country of their birth.

My personal conclusion is that developed nations should agree to take in more refugees,

but only in restricted numbers and in extreme cases. I also believe that there needs to be
a global effort to provide aid to solve the problems that cause emigration. Prevention is

as they say better than cure.

We are becoming increasingly dependent on computer technology. It is

used in business, crime detection and even to fly planes. What will it be

used for in future? Is this dependence on technology a good thing or

should we be suspicious of its benefits?

As we move into the twenty-first century, it is clear to see that we have become more

and more dependent on computers and information technology. This technology now

reaches into almost every area of our lives and it is easy to predict that this phenomenon

is only going to grow. My personal belief is that this presents a variety of dangers.

It is highly likely that in the future there will be comparatively few aspects of our lives

that will not be influenced by computer technology. The probability is that it

will control more and more forms of communication, transforming fields such as
education and business when video-conferencing platforms become more stable. It

might even affect romance with more people forming relationships online.

While there may be benefits to this technological revolution, there are also a number of

potential dangers. Perhaps the most serious of these would be that if people rely on

computers too much for communication, they could in fact begin to communicate less

well. For example, if every member of a family had their own computer screen and

smart phone, they might speak less and less often to one another and simply look at a

screen. This would be serious because our ability to communicate is an essential part of

our humanity.

My conclusion is that the growth of computer technology is inevitable, but that this may

not be entirely positive. Just one area in which it is possible to foresee dangers is

communication, and if we are going to ensure that computers do not become a

negative influence, we need to think carefully how we use them.

young people in cities.

What has caused this? What solutions can you suggest?

The rise of crime among young people is an urgent problem in many cities that needs to

be addressed. However, in order to find a solution, it is first of all necessary to

understand what has led to this happening. In this essay, I first of all examine

the reasons for the rise in youth crime, then I suggest how this problem may be resolved.

Perhaps the principal cause of this rise in youth crime is the increased use of drugs and

alcohol among young people. Many cities suffer from the phenomenon of binge drinking

by teenagers who lose control under the influence of alcohol and commit crimes. For

instance, it is a common sight on the streets of Britain to see fights breaking out outside

pubs and clubs. Similarly, there is a clear connection between drug abuse among the

young and crime. It is still unfortunately the case that young people frequently see drugs

as cool and become addicted. It is a common occurrence for these addicts to resort to

petty theft in order to pay for their habit.

There are a variety of potential ways of combatting this problem. One possibility that is

sometimes suggested is a much stricter system of penalties and punishments to deter

young people from a life of crime. That might work, but it would also be sensible

to improve the system of education so that young people were better informed about the

dangers of drugs and alcohol. This should have the effect of dealing with the issues that

cause youth crime in the first place.

young offenders and if the authorities wish to tackle youth crime, one approach would

be to educate the young more effectively.